Lord, Is It I?

When Jesus Christ told the Twelve that one of them would betray Him, He did not immediately identify the man. Matthew records:

“And as they did eat, he said, Verily I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me.

“And they were exceeding sorrowful, and began every one of them to say unto him, Lord, is it I?” (Matthew 26:21–22).

These men had walked with Christ, heard His teachings, witnessed His miracles, and left much to follow Him. Yet when the warning came, they did not begin by identifying someone else as the guilty person. Each turned the question inward: “Lord, is it I?”

That is the proper posture of a disciple before God. When the word of the Lord exposes pride, hypocrisy, selfishness, unbelief, disobedience, or any other sin, our first responsibility is to examine ourselves before Him. We do not begin by deciding who else needs the warning. We ask whether the Lord is showing us something that needs to be corrected in us.

The question must also be sincere. “Lord, is it I?” means that we are willing to receive whatever answer the Lord gives. If He reveals sin, we repent. If He exposes weakness, we learn. If He corrects our understanding, we change it. We do not decide beforehand that the answer must be no simply because we feel confident in our own righteousness, judgment, calling, experience, or understanding.

Humility is the willingness to remain correctable before God. Jesus Christ knows us perfectly, and a disciple must always leave room for Him to show us what we do not yet see.

Christ Knows Us Better Than We Know Ourselves

Peter shows why our own confidence cannot replace the Lord’s knowledge. On the same night, Jesus warned Peter that a severe test was coming:

“And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:

“But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren.

“And he said unto him, Lord, I am ready to go with thee, both into prison, and to death.

“And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.” (Luke 22:31–34).

Peter was sincere. He loved Jesus Christ. He believed that when the test came he would stand beside the Savior regardless of the cost. Matthew records him saying, “Though all men shall be offended because of thee, yet will I never be offended,” and then, “Though I should die with thee, yet will I not deny thee” (Matthew 26:33–35).

Peter’s feelings were real, but his understanding of himself was wrong. Within hours, he denied the Savior three times. After the third denial, Peter remembered the word of Jesus and “went out, and wept bitterly” (Matthew 26:69–75).

The lesson is direct: strong feelings about our own righteousness are not revelation. We may sincerely believe that we would never fail in a particular way and still be wrong about ourselves. Spiritual experience, past faithfulness, good intentions, and even a divine calling do not make our self-assessment equal to Christ’s knowledge.

Jesus also knew that Peter’s failure was not the end of his discipleship. Before Peter fell, Christ had already told him, “when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren” (Luke 22:32). The Savior saw both the weakness Peter had not yet recognized and the work Peter would still perform after repentance.

A disciple must therefore believe Jesus Christ above his own heart. When the Lord warns us about a weakness, we do not answer Him with our confidence in ourselves. We listen. God knows us better than we know ourselves.

Who Art Thou That Judgest Another Man’s Servant?

Paul addressed a serious problem among the Saints in Rome. Some believers felt free to eat foods that others would not eat. Some regarded particular days differently from other believers. These differences had become occasions for contempt and judgment. Paul commanded both sides to stop treating the other as though they had authority to determine the other person’s standing before God:

“Him that is weak in the faith receive ye, but not to doubtful disputations.

“For one believeth that he may eat all things: another, who is weak, eateth herbs.

“Let not him that eateth despise him that eateth not; and let not him which eateth not judge him that eateth: for God hath received him.

“Who art thou that judgest another man’s servant? to his own master he standeth or falleth. Yea, he shall be holden up: for God is able to make him stand.” (Romans 14:1–4).

Paul’s point is about ownership and judgment. The believer who ate was not the servant of the believer who abstained. The believer who abstained was not the servant of the believer who ate. Both belonged to Jesus Christ. Paul continues by explaining that whether they ate or abstained, they were doing it unto the Lord, because “whether we live therefore, or die, we are the Lord’s” (Romans 14:6–8).

He then brings the doctrine to its conclusion:

“But why dost thou judge thy brother? or why dost thou set at nought thy brother? for we shall all stand before the judgment seat of Christ.

“For it is written, As I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God.

“So then every one of us shall give account of himself to God.” (Romans 14:10–12).

Romans 14 is teaching that we are not the master of another disciple. Jesus Christ is. Another person will answer to Him for his obedience, his motives, his covenants, and the light he has received. We will answer to Christ for ours. We do not have authority to take the judgment seat that belongs to Him.

Paul teaches the same boundary when speaking of his own ministry. He did not make the Corinthians’ judgment final, but neither did he make his own opinion of himself final:

“But with me it is a very small thing that I should be judged of you, or of man’s judgment: yea, I judge not mine own self.

“For I know nothing by myself; yet am I not hereby justified: but he that judgeth me is the Lord.

“Therefore judge nothing before the time, until the Lord come, who both will bring to light the hidden things of darkness, and will make manifest the counsels of the hearts.” (1 Corinthians 4:3–5).

The Lord possesses what human judgment does not: perfect knowledge of the heart. He knows what was revealed, what was understood, what was hidden, what was obeyed, what was resisted, and why a person acted. Paul therefore refuses to make either public opinion or private self-approval the final standard. Christ judges the servant.

This is also why we must be careful about claiming knowledge of another person’s inward spiritual experience. Paul wrote:

“For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.” (1 Corinthians 2:11).

We can observe conduct and fruit. We can hear what another person claims. We can respond to what enters our own responsibility. We cannot honestly claim to possess an inward experience that was never given to us. Another disciple is Christ’s servant, and Christ alone possesses the complete knowledge by which that servant will finally stand or fall.

Discern Your Own Stewardship

Revelation follows stewardship, but stewardship always has boundaries. God gives authority and revelation for the responsibility He has actually assigned. A calling does not give a person unlimited revelatory authority over everyone within that calling.

Elder Dale G. Renlund explained this principle by comparing revelation to the runways assigned to airplane pilots. Pilots do not take off and land wherever they choose. They operate within an appointed runway and flight path. Personal revelation works within similar bounds. Elder Renlund taught:

“We receive personal revelation only within our purview and not within the prerogative of others.”

— Dale G. Renlund, “A Framework for Personal Revelation,” October 2022 General Conference

The early experience of Hiram Page demonstrates why these boundaries matter. Hiram Page claimed to receive revelations governing the entire Church. The Lord corrected that claim because revelation for the Church belonged to the prophetic stewardship He had given Joseph Smith (Doctrine and Covenants 28:2, 6–7). Hiram Page could receive personal revelation, but he could not enlarge that revelation into authority over the Church. That was not his runway.

The same principle limits every other stewardship. The prophet may receive governing revelation for the Church and the work the Lord has placed under his stewardship. A bishop may receive revelation concerning the ecclesiastical duties of his office and the responsibilities the Lord has given him toward the members he serves. Parents may receive revelation concerning the raising, protection, and instruction of their children. Household leaders may receive revelation concerning the order and responsibilities of their household. In every case, the revelation belongs to the stewardship and does not automatically extend beyond it.

Stewardship is therefore matter-specific, not person-total. Having stewardship over someone in one responsibility does not give a person authority to receive revelation concerning every part of that individual’s life. A bishop does not become the revelator for a member’s employment, marriage decisions, residence, personal calling, or every private choice simply because he is that member’s bishop. A household leader does not receive every revelation concerning every adult within the household. A parent does not retain governing revelation over every decision of an adult child. Each steward must remain on the runway the Lord actually assigned.

Elder Renlund made this distinction particularly clear when speaking about personal decisions. He taught that an individual can receive revelation concerning where to live, what career to pursue, and whom to marry. Church leaders may teach doctrine and give inspired counsel, but those personal decisions remain with the individual. As he said:

“That is your revelation to receive; that is your runway.”

— Dale G. Renlund, “A Framework for Personal Revelation,” October 2022 General Conference

This is why it is wrong for a bishop to say to a member, “I prayed about it, and the Lord told me that you are not supposed to change jobs,” merely because he is that person’s bishop. He may counsel the member. He may teach principles. He may even receive revelation concerning how he should help that member within his calling. But the choice of employment belongs to the individual’s personal stewardship unless the Lord has specifically placed some separate responsibility over that matter. The bishop’s calling does not move the member’s personal runway into the bishop’s jurisdiction.

The first responsibility for personal revelation therefore remains with the individual. Each person must hear the Lord concerning the covenants, decisions, conduct, relationships, work, and responsibilities God has placed directly upon them. Other stewards may receive revelation where those matters intersect their actual responsibilities, but they receive revelation concerning their stewardship within the situation, not unlimited revelation concerning the person.

This distinction also governs how a person responds to someone else’s claimed revelation. I have had people say to me, “I do not need to pray about this. I already know what you are doing is wrong.” Others have claimed that God told them He did not command me to do what I said He commanded me to do. In making that claim, they are not merely seeking direction concerning their own response. They are claiming revelation concerning whether God spoke to another person at all.

Unless the Lord has given you stewardship over that person in that particular matter, that is not your revelation to receive. The questions that belong to you are: What does God want me to do? What does He want me to learn? Is there truth here that I need to receive? If there is, what do I need to change? Is He asking me to participate, refuse, speak, wait, establish a boundary, or step away? Those questions remain on your runway because they concern your obedience.

The governing rule is simple: stay on the runway God assigned. Receive revelation fully for the stewardship He has given you, but do not enlarge that stewardship beyond its bounds. Another person’s presence within one of your stewardships does not transfer that person’s entire life into your jurisdiction. Each disciple remains responsible before Jesus Christ to receive the personal revelation that belongs to his or her own stewardship.

“I Already Know” and the Refusal to Pray

Nephi connects revelation directly to what a disciple is responsible to do:

“For behold, again I say unto you that if ye will enter in by the way, and receive the Holy Ghost, it will show unto you all things what ye should do.” (2 Nephi 32:5).

A few verses later, Nephi warns against the influence that stops a person from seeking that direction:

“For if ye would hearken unto the Spirit which teacheth a man to pray, ye would know that ye must pray; for the evil spirit teacheth not a man to pray, but teacheth him that he must not pray.

“But behold, I say unto you that ye must pray always, and not faint; that ye must not perform any thing unto the Lord save in the first place ye shall pray unto the Father in the name of Christ, that he will consecrate thy performance unto thee, that thy performance may be for the welfare of thy soul.” (2 Nephi 32:8–9).

Nephi’s instruction is plain. The Holy Ghost teaches us what we should do, and the disciple is commanded to pray before acting unto the Lord. The thought “I do not need to pray about this because I already know” moves in the opposite direction. It closes the very inquiry through which the Lord could correct our understanding, define our responsibility, or show us how to act.

This can happen even in a person who prays regularly. The refusal may concern only one subject. A person sees a circumstance, forms a conclusion, and decides that there is nothing further to ask. “I know what this person is.” “I know why they are doing it.” “I know what God would say.” “There is no reason to pray.”

That is pride because it treats present understanding as complete. Scripture, established commandments, reason, experience, and observable fruit are all part of righteous discernment, but none of them make us omniscient concerning the circumstance before us. The Lord may still need to tell us when to speak, when to remain silent, whether the matter belongs to us, how to protect our stewardship, whether we have misunderstood something, or what He intends to teach us through the experience.

Prayer is not an attempt to persuade God to change commandments He has already given. It is how we place our own understanding and conduct under His direction. A humble disciple does not say, “I already know, therefore I have no need to ask.” He says, “Lord, what would Thou have me do?”

No Man Is Above Reproach

No calling places a servant of God beyond correction. Prophets and apostles remain accountable to Jesus Christ, and the scriptures deliberately preserve occasions when great servants were corrected so that we will not confuse divine calling with personal infallibility.

Doctrine and Covenants 3 came after the loss of the 116 manuscript pages of the Book of Mormon. Joseph Smith had allowed the manuscript to pass into Martin Harris’s custody after repeatedly seeking permission. The manuscript was lost, and the Lord rebuked Joseph for fearing man more than God and for not keeping the commandments he had been given. In that setting the Lord said:

“For although a man may have many revelations, and have power to do many mighty works, yet if he boasts in his own strength, and sets at naught the counsels of God, and follows after the dictates of his own will and carnal desires, he must fall and incur the vengeance of a just God upon him.” (Doctrine and Covenants 3:4).

The wording matters. “Many revelations” and “many mighty works” do not place a servant above correction. Joseph’s previous revelations were not a defense against the Lord’s present rebuke. His responsibility was to repent and return to obedience.

Lehi experienced the same principle in a different way. While his family was traveling in the wilderness, Nephi’s bow broke and the group could no longer obtain food. Their suffering became severe. The record says that Laman, Lemuel, the sons of Ishmael, and “also my father began to murmur against the Lord his God” (1 Nephi 16:20).

Nephi made a new bow and then approached his father and asked where he should go to obtain food. Lehi humbled himself and inquired of the Lord. The record then says:

“And it came to pass that the voice of the Lord came unto my father; and he was truly chastened because of his murmuring against the Lord, insomuch that he was brought down into the depths of sorrow.” (1 Nephi 16:25).

Lehi was a prophet. He had seen visions, heard the Lord, led his family out of Jerusalem, and obeyed difficult commandments. He still murmured under affliction and had to be chastened. His calling did not make the murmuring righteous. The proper response was humility, inquiry, and correction.

Peter likewise required correction after becoming a leading Apostle. Paul records that Peter had been eating with Gentile believers in Antioch, but when certain Jewish Christians arrived, Peter withdrew from the Gentiles because he feared those “of the circumcision.” Other Jewish believers followed his example. Paul says:

“But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.” (Galatians 2:11).

Paul explains that he confronted Peter because “they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel” (Galatians 2:14). Peter’s apostolic authority did not make that conduct correct. The truth of the gospel remained the standard, and Peter remained accountable to it.

These accounts establish one doctrine: a genuine calling never removes the need to be correctable. The Lord may rebuke a prophet, a prophet may need to humble himself, and one Apostle may correct another. Spiritual authority increases accountability before Christ. It does not place the servant beyond reproach.

Lord, Correct Me

I have had to live this principle personally. Someone I deeply respected, loved, and cherished told me that I was an evil man leading people astray. I was told that I was following the lusts of my heart, that the spiritual experiences behind what I was doing were of the devil, and that I had been deceived by the devil appearing as an angel of light. These accusations challenged the very source of the experiences and revelations upon which I had been acting.

I listened. When the conversation ended, I said that I would pray about it. I then knelt before the Lord and broke down crying. I told Him that I had been trying to obey Him in all things, but that if I was wrong, then I was wrong and I was sorry. I told Him that I wanted to repent, that I would do whatever He required, and that I did not want to defend an error simply because I had already invested myself in it.

I asked Him to correct me. I asked Him to show me where I was wrong, help me understand, and help me cast away anything I should not be carrying. I poured out my heart before Him and then asked again, “Lord, please correct me.”

The Spirit directed me to Isaiah 40. I had not chosen the chapter beforehand and was not searching through the scriptures for something that would justify me. The chapter declares the greatness and complete understanding of God. Isaiah asks:

“Who hath directed the Spirit of the Lord, or being his counsellor hath taught him?

“With whom took he counsel, and who instructed him, and taught him in the path of judgment, and taught him knowledge, and shewed to him the way of understanding?” (Isaiah 40:13–14).

Isaiah then places the nations themselves in comparison with God, saying that they are “as a drop of a bucket” before Him (Isaiah 40:15), and later declares:

“Hast thou not known? hast thou not heard, that the everlasting God, the Lord, the Creator of the ends of the earth, fainteth not, neither is weary? there is no searching of his understanding.” (Isaiah 40:28).

The chapter was teaching me that God does not need man to instruct Him. His understanding is not limited by what people can see, and His work is not governed by human judgment. As I read, the Spirit bore witness to me that what I was doing was right, that God was over all things, and that He knew what He was doing. I needed to rely upon Him.

I returned to prayer, and the Lord directed me to Isaiah 20. That chapter records a difficult prophetic sign. The Lord commanded Isaiah:

“Go and loose the sackcloth from off thy loins, and put off thy shoe from thy foot. And he did so, walking naked and barefoot.

“And the Lord said, Like as my servant Isaiah hath walked naked and barefoot three years for a sign and wonder upon Egypt and upon Ethiopia;

“So shall the king of Assyria lead away the Egyptians prisoners, and the Ethiopians captives, young and old, naked and barefoot, even with their buttocks uncovered, to the shame of Egypt.

“And they shall be afraid and ashamed of Ethiopia their expectation, and of Egypt their glory.” (Isaiah 20:2–5).

Isaiah’s conduct was commanded by the Lord. The humiliation was part of the sign. His exposed condition represented the shame and captivity that Assyria would bring upon Egypt and Ethiopia. The outward act therefore had a meaning that could not be determined merely by looking at Isaiah. The Lord had given the command, the Lord had assigned its meaning, and Isaiah’s responsibility was to obey.

When I had finished reading the chapter, I returned to prayer and asked the Lord what He was trying to teach me and help me understand. Through the Spirit, He said to me:

“Isaiah was commanded to do these things by Me, and all the house of Israel would mock him, and he would feel ashamed. But it was a type of what was about to happen to the house of Israel as a warning. And what I had commanded you, you will go before them, and they shall mock you, and you shall feel ashamed, and it shall be as though they have stripped you naked. But in the end, it is they that shall be ashamed, for I the Lord have commanded this thing, and ye are obedient unto Me, for thou art Mine, and all those that shall condemn thee shall stand condemned at the last day.”

That answer came after I had asked to be corrected. I had not gone before the Lord demanding that He prove another person wrong. I had placed myself before Him and asked Him to show me if I was the one who had been deceived. I was willing to repent if that was His answer.

That is what the question “Lord, is it I?” requires. The question must be real enough that the Lord is free to correct us. When He corrects us, we repent. When He tells us that we are obeying Him, we continue to obey. Humility is not deciding the answer before we pray. It is placing ourselves before Jesus Christ and receiving the answer He gives.

Walk by Faith and Let the Lord Do His Own Work

Receiving revelation does not make a person omniscient. God may reveal exactly what He wants a servant to know while withholding many details concerning how, when, through whom, or under what circumstances His word will be fulfilled.

Paul states the limitation plainly:

“For we know in part, and we prophesy in part.” (1 Corinthians 13:9).

He later adds, “now we see through a glass, darkly” and “now I know in part” (1 Corinthians 13:12). Paul is not saying that revelation is false. He is saying that mortal knowledge remains partial. A prophet may truly know what God revealed and still not know everything surrounding that revelation.

This distinction must remain clear. Revelation is what God actually says or shows. Interpretation is what we conclude about the details He did not state. Problems begin when we attach our assumptions to the revelation and then speak of both with the same authority.

Isaiah teaches why we must leave room for God to act beyond our expectations:

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the Lord.

“For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are my ways higher than your ways, and my thoughts than your thoughts.” (Isaiah 55:8–9).

The same passage then speaks of the certainty of God’s own word:

“So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.” (Isaiah 55:11).

Those two truths belong together. We do not know all of God’s ways, but His word will accomplish what He sent it to accomplish. Our lack of knowledge about the method does not weaken His ability to fulfill the promise.

Doctrine and Covenants 3 teaches the same thing in the very revelation that corrected Joseph Smith:

“The works, and the designs, and the purposes of God cannot be frustrated, neither can they come to naught.

“For God doth not walk in crooked paths, neither doth he turn to the right hand nor to the left, neither doth he vary from that which he hath said, therefore his paths are straight, and his course is one eternal round.

“Remember, remember that it is not the work of God that is frustrated, but the work of men.” (Doctrine and Covenants 3:1–3).

Joseph could be corrected because Joseph was a servant. God’s work remained God’s work. The servant’s weakness did not transfer weakness to the Lord, and the servant did not need to control every circumstance in order for God’s purposes to stand.

Gamaliel recognized the same distinction when the Jewish council was deciding what to do with the Apostles. After describing earlier movements that had collapsed when their leaders died, he counseled:

“Refrain from these men, and let them alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will come to nought:

“But if it be of God, ye cannot overthrow it; lest haply ye be found even to fight against God.” (Acts 5:38–39).

Gamaliel’s counsel placed the final issue with God. Human opposition could not make a divine work cease to be divine, and human force could not overthrow what God was determined to accomplish.

The Book of Mormon states the principle even more directly. Speaking of the latter-day work of bringing forth the record, the Lord says:

“The learned shall not read them, for they have rejected them, and I am able to do mine own work; wherefore thou shalt read the words which I shall give unto thee.

“Touch not the things which are sealed, for I will bring them forth in mine own due time; for I will show unto the children of men that I am able to do mine own work.” (2 Nephi 27:20–21).

The servant is given words to read and a boundary concerning what not to touch. The Lord keeps the timing, the sealed portion, and the accomplishment of the greater work in His own hands. That is the order of faith.

Our responsibility is therefore to obey what God actually reveals and refuse to manufacture what He has not revealed. We do not abandon a command because we cannot see how the Lord will fulfill it, and we do not add our own design because we think we must make His promise come true. Revelation gives the light required for our present stewardship. Faith walks in that light while the Lord accomplishes what remains His to do.

Conclusion

“Lord, is it I?” is a question of submission to Jesus Christ. Its purpose is not to keep a disciple perpetually unsure of everything he knows. Its purpose is to keep the disciple open to the One who knows perfectly.

When the Lord shows us that we are wrong, we repent. When He gives us a stewardship, we remain inside it. When He speaks, we believe Him above our own confidence and above the judgment of men. When He has not revealed the whole design, we obey what He has given and leave the rest in His hands.

The disciple does not need to be his own final judge, another servant’s master, or the architect of God’s fulfillment. He needs to remain teachable before Christ and faithful to the answer he receives. That is the posture of the question: Lord, is it I? What would Thou have me do?